Biblical Criticism & History Forum - earlywritings.com

John2 wrote:MrMacSon wrote:

• "The Johns and the Johannine literature is confusing."

The Wikipedia article on Presbyter John says that *Before Eusebius there exists no statement about a second John in Asia." I haven't checked these sources yet but if they pan out then this would be another instance of Eusebius being the first to mention something.

"The view expounded by Eusebius has not remained uncontested. The Catholic Encyclopedia of the early 1900s, for instance, stated that the distinction "has no historical basis." To support this view, it related four main arguments:

*The testimony of Eusebius is disputed, as his statement that Papias "was not himself a hearer and eye-witness of the holy apostles" is contradicted by a passage in Eusebius' Chronicle which expressly calls the Apostle John the teacher of Papias.

*Eusebius' interpretation might derive from his opposition to Chiliasm and the Book of Revelation. Distinguishing between two persons called John, Eusebius could downgrade that book as the work of the Presbyter instead of the Apostle and also undermine Papias' reputation as a pupil of an Apostle.

*In the fragment, Papias uses the same words - presbyter (or elder) and disciples of the Lord – both in reference to the Apostles and to the second John. The double occurrence of John is explained by Papias' "peculiar relationship" to John, from which he had learned some things indirectly and others directly.

*Before Eusebius there exists no statement about a second John in Asia. Especially noteworthy in this context is Irenaeus of Lyons, himself a pupil of Polycarp of Smyrna. In his book Adversus Haereses, which survives in a Latin version, Irenaeus mentions "Papias, the hearer of John, and a companion of Polycarp" (Book V, chapter 33), without indicating that this was another John than "John, the disciple of the Lord, who also had leaned upon His breast [and] did himself publish a Gospel during his residence at Ephesus in Asia" (Book III, chapter 1)."

And that:

"In his "Letter to Florinus", which survives as a fragment, Irenaeus speaks of "Polycarp having thus received [information] from the eye-witnesses of the Word of life" and of John as "that blessed and apostolical presbyter".

MrMacSon wrote:
The Johns and the Johannine literature is confusing. See - http://www.earlywritings.com/forum/view ... f=3&t=2177
eg

The identification of the author of John's Gospel with the John of 'the Apocalypse'/Revelation was common in the 2nd century: Irenaeus assumed they were the same authors. The 3rd century's Dionysius of Alexandria was unusual in rejecting the identification of the two writers. Many modern critical scholars agree with Dionysius: the author of the Apocalypse/Revelation, John of Patmos, is different from the author of the Gospel of John and Epistles of John.

It's interesting that the author of the Muratorian Fragment thought or assumed that the author of the Gospel of John was the same as the author of the First Epistle of John: in the middle of discussing the Gospel of John he says

• 'what marvel then is it that John brings forward these several things so constantly in his epistles also, saying in his own person, "What we have seen with our eyes and heard with our ears, and our hands have handled that have we written".' (1 John 1:1)

• < ...snip... >

The author of the Muratorian Fragment also refers to the author of the 'Apocalypse of John' (Revelation) as "the predecessor" of Paul, who, he assumes, wrote to seven churches (Rev 2–3) before Paul wrote to seven churches.

John2 wrote:MrMacSon wrote:

"The reference to Eusebius as 'half-Arian' is interesting."

Eusebius was an Arian before he accepted the Nicene Creed:

"At the First Council of Nicaea, 325, he signed the Confession, but only after a long and desperate opposition in which he 'subscribe[d] with hand only, not heart' according to ancient sources."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Nicomedia

• * = the First Council of Constantinople

John2 wrote:Oops, wrong Eusebius ...

Eusebius of Nicomedia (died 341) was the man who baptised Constantine the Great ....

Political and religious career
In complement to his theological interests, Eusebius was a skilled politician. Upon his return, he regained the lost ground resulted from the First Council of Nicaea, established alliances with other groups such as the Meletians and expelled many opponents.

He was described by modern historians as an "ambitious intriguer" [12] and a "consummate political player".[1] He was also described by ancient sources as a high-handed person who was also aggressive in his dealings.;[13] he also used his allies to spy on his opponents.

He was able to dislodge and exile three key opponents who espoused the First Council of Nicaea: Eustathius of Antioch in 330, Athanasius of Alexandria in 335 and Marcellus of Ancyra in 336. This was no small feat since Athanasius was regarded as a "man of God" by Constantine.[14] and both Eustathius and Athanasius held top positions in the church.

Another major feat was his appointment as the Patriarch of Constantinople by expelling Paul I of Constantinople; Paul would eventually return as Patriarch after Eusebius' death.

Even outside the empire, Eusebius had great influence.

MrMacSon wrote:

John2 wrote:Oops, wrong Eusebius ...

Ha! I didn't notice. Though I wonder if they were/'are' one & the same person (as with the supposedly two Dionysiuses at the same time)
...........................................